Talk:QuickTime Alternative

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the QuickTime Alternative article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article was nominated for deletion on August 11, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contents 1 It's all gone now 2 Who's behind this package? 3 AfD 4 Spam link? 5 Citations 6 Criticisms at the end 7 cpu usage

[edit] It's all gone now

Related to the discussion regardings the legitimacy of QuickTime Alternative, Codec Guide has today (June 4 2007) taken down the package at the request of Apple Inc.. So the article needs to be rewritten to past tense...
--Waltgibson 09:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Who's behind this package?

Anyone knows who's behind this package? I've been wondering about this for years now...

Well, Mr. Jobs, you needn't know everything.

[edit] AfD

The article deletion is still in progress, and is not archived yet. Please don't remove the afd notice. It will only gather more support if it is supported by the community--Anupamsr 12:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spam link?

I tried to update the version information on this article, but it prevented me from doing so because it had a link to free-codecs.com which it called spam. This site is the premier distribution site for QuickTime Alternative as evidenced by the first result in Google when searching for quicktime alternative.

[edit] Citations

I removed that bit about Quicktime being difficult to obtain without iTunes bundled. If you go to their website, the download link to the standalone version is as visible/prominent as their bundled download. Also, citing public reviews and personal blogs seem to be frowned upon based on my assessment of the situation over at Real Alternative's talk page. I've added a citation needed tag.--67.168.0.155 04:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criticisms at the end

Are the overly intrusive installation and tendency to leave components behind on uninstall problems with QuickTime Alternative, or with the official QuickTime software? The article doesn't make it very clear. CarrerCrytharis 00:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] cpu usage

QT seems to hog the cpu, driving the cpu to 100% even on fast modern Windows PCs. If QTA is better about cpu usage, that would be Notable. -69.87.204.26 (talk) 21:57, 3 April 2008 (UTC)